But I have a different problem with the Design for Laughter routine. I don't mind the convoluted plot, because the final effect is powerful enough (from my experience). However, I have an issue with the performance after the spectator sees his card at the bottom of the third cut deck. I take it, look at it, think a bit and say "Nah, that's probably not your card either." Well, I've tried it with three different people (aged 10, 30 and 40) and all three of them insisted that it was their card. I had to extract myself with a lot of nonsense talk - which kind of worked since everyone was surprised by the ending - but I feel it's a real hurdle in the performance. I have to "get past" it and hope for the best before I can continue.

Any ideas on how to make it flow better?

Thanks a lot.

The Burnaby KidInner circle
Busan, South Korea
2743 Posts

Posted: May 16, 2018 09:54 pm

0

The original routining is a bit problematic in this regard. If you cut three piles, and their card shows up at the bottom of the third pile, psychologically it makes it feel like that's the end that you were building towards.

There are a couple of ways of dealing with this. One is through pure thespianism. Thespianism? Thespianity? Thespia... Acting. Pure acting. You overwhelm them with your chops so that they're passive throughout and by the time they think to even speak up, you've already moved on to the next bit.

The other is through routine structure. For some ideas on this, go here and scroll down...

Thank you! The burnabykid article is a good idea. I'll try to come up with some personal distraction, as this really seems to be the weak spot on of this otherwise very nice routine.

TeddyBoyNew user
New York, NY
88 Posts

Posted: May 23, 2018 07:24 am

0

If I remember this trick as it was described in RRTCM, the performer provides key instructions to the spectator[s] before starting. The spectators were not to telegraph to the performer whether or not they have seen their selected card, or that the performer has made an error, or that something has apparently gone awry. The spectators should neither verbally, nor by use of facial expressions/body language indicate whether or not the performer had made the "error." Having done this, I have not experienced the issue that you describe.